Imagine the energy of a star lensing in the very densest core. We can start by rearranging Einstein’s formula and creating matter from energy:

E = mc²

m0= E/c²

m0 = E/(3x10⁸)² (m/s)²
m0 = E/(9x10¹⁶)   (m/s)²

To make 1 kg of new matter, we'll need almost 10¹⁷J of energy.  More precisely 90 petajoules.  A petajoule is 10¹⁵J.

The solar radiation (in Joules) received from the Sun by one square meter of the Earth's surface per second is:

1.37 × 10³J

Almost 60 trillion square meters at earth's surface are required to create 1 kg of new matter in 1 s.  The total surface area of earth is 510 trillion square meters.  But at the sun's face the power output is much, much higher.

The sun produces 3.9 x 10²⁶J/s (W) at its surface.  In the core this could be much higher.  If we apply an inverse-square transformation and assume 99% of the radius to be traversed to reach the area where a planet of Mercury's size fits in the sun, the energy in the core might be (1/99)^-2 or 10000x as great as that at the surface, about 3.9 x 10³⁰ W.

3.9 x 10³⁰ W/9 x 10¹⁶ (m/s)²

= 4.3 x 10¹³ kg of new matter/s

 So how much energy is needed to make a planet?  It depends on the mass.  Mercury is 3.3 x 10²³kg.  If 1/10000 of the core's total energy output were being focused and condensed into new matter in a lensing process we can do some nominal estimates of the time required:

4.3 x 10¹³ kg/s/10000

= 4.3 x 10⁹ kg/s

3.3 x 10²³ kg/4.3x10⁹ kg/s

= 7.7 x 10¹³ s

Sounds like a lot. A year is about 3.2 x 10⁷ s.

7.7 x 10¹³ s/3.2 x 10⁷ s/y

= 2.4 x 10⁶ years 

2.4 million years are needed using these numbers to create Mercury.  This seems reasonable.  What about a gas giant?  The mass of Jupiter is 1.9 x 10²⁷ kg, around 5800 times that of Mercury.  So it would take 5800x as long to make Jupiter. This  is longer than the current age attributed to our solar system.  However, if we consider the mass at the time of ejection from the sun as being much lighter than the current mass, say 10% as much, the time required is reduced to around 2.4 billion years, which does agree with current models in regards to age.  We can also attribute more than 1/10000 of the energy being used in the fusion of matter from energy to speed things up.

What exactly takes place inside a gravity well?  How exactly might matter be created from energy? 

A wave of light can be bent by gravity in the core of a black hole, forming links and chains, stable localized snippets arranged into packets. Equal pressure from all sides in the centre of the gravity well causes wave circularization - the most stable configuration. Prefusion quantum soup.  

It becomes quickly apparent that the problem of 'mass deficit' is merely a result of not seeing the masses of galaxies and stars as they appear in the present time.  We are limited to views of these as they were in the past, before mass increase.

Stacking of wave maxima is one direction we need to explore in the creation of set masses aka quarks. 

Are there fundamental frequencies at the root of matter organizing into our particular periodic table of elements?  Do these arise from progenitor G wells? Is there an Alpha Maker for various types of elemental matter somewhere in the recesses of 0 time?

One must consider the regularity of the elements. The discovery of these by electrolysis and weights centuries ago is extraordinary. One wonders if local field drivers like the earth, moon and sun have a part in these arrangements. 

With more attention to mass increase (E->m) research we may find that new elements may exist away from our particular niche in these massive G field locators. More massive stars for example may offer a variant field template for matter to organize. In this case we count the particular local inflections we find in our neighbourhood regular. K. B. Ni. Au. Always within reason the same with variations in small percentages - isotopes. What alters the percent of these variants? Movement of earth with respect to Luna and Sol has variant G fields at various moments. These changes if at the root of mass creation may be responsible for some of the isotopy we find. Might comets or asteroids or any body farther or closer to Sol have variants in isotope mixes? Might this reflect the G fields underpinning the local space? 

Might the Centauri system with multiple suns have more exotic matter yet? Again we look to evidence from beyond our atmosphere. Samples from our moon may have variations in isotopy due to G field variations wrt those found on earth.

That much is indicated by sheer force of basic logic. 

The funds spent on multi billion dollar particle colliders might be more efficiently used to make a device using lasers in a sphere focused to a point at its centre in a vacuum to make a quark.

A Sphere studded with lasers with variable settings voided of all particles by vacuum that focuses all light to a point in the centre ought to result in the creation of quarks. Study of the Variation in light properties and type and arrangement of quarks produced in this device will become a field of its own.

This is as per m=E/c²